We are mutually becoming what we are, through the encounter with others, we are experiencing ourselves in exchange with, in relation to others, to everything that surrounds us. When we recognize this the question raises, what there is to be analyzed, if the analysing person herself is part of the whole event. „Who’s performance is assessed? My own? The other ones? Our shared one? What does it mean that we academics always separate - for heuristic reasons - the things and at the same time claim that they belong together?

Earthport counts on the moment, the unrepeatability, the irretrievability, counts on a second time being a different time, that humans and things continuously change, that everything is in flow. Thereby the installation emphasizes on the ethical dimension of mutual contact. It refers to our responsibility for the creation of the encounter, that each word we say, each touch we allow or initiate, will create in response another word, another touch. That what we do, feel, see, hear and say creates what it will have been.

The interaction with the audience shall enable to break classical stereotypes and develop new aesthetic approaches. In the context of the public discussion of a political function of theatre, Earthport gets a special legitimation, to which Heddon/Iball/Zerhin refer when they write: „the current preoccupation with performances of intimacy is arguably contextually related to wider cultural concerns around inter-subjectivity, anxieties over how - in a world of inter-racial and inter-ethnic conflict and global inequalities and injustices - we might live together, better."

At the end of the visit of Earthport the practices openness and responsively is contrasting the invisible coat of protection that the visitor carries on her way through the streets to the Underground. To be sensitized for this difference can in deed be considered as a concrete aftermath of the event.